The Management of Q-Wave Versus Non-Q-Wave Infarction
For some time, myocardial infarction has by convention been referred to as subendocardial (nontransmural) or transmural infarction. This is an electrocardiographs classification in which patients with an infarction accompanied by Q-waves on the electrocardiogram are said to have a transmural and those without a Q-wave a subendocardial, or nontransmural, infarction. Despite being an electrocardiographs classification, it has pathological implications (1). Experimental and clinical data do not show a consistent relationship between transmural myocardial injury and the development of Q-waves or vice versa (2). However, patients with infarction manifesting only ST-T changes have less extensive damage (infarct size). Thus, it has been suggested to classify infarction as Q-wave infarction (transmural) or non-Q-wave (nontransmural). Myocardial infarction occurring in association with new Q-waves of 30 msec duration or greater is referred to as Q-wave infarction. Myocardial infarction associated with ST-T changes without the development of new Q-waves will be referred to as non-Q-wave infarction. Patients with previous Q-wave infarction developing new changes but restricted to those leads with previous Q-waves will be classified as indeterminate. However, if the new changes are in leads other than those associated with previous Q-waves, the above classification would be appropriate.
KeywordsPlacebo Depression Ischemia Radionuclide Cardiol
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.Herrick JB. JAMA 72:387, 1919.Google Scholar
- 5.Pardee HEB. Am J Mec Sci 169:270, 1925.Google Scholar
- 7.Roberts R. Heart & Lung 10:486–506, 1981.Google Scholar
- 8.Roberts R. In: Techniques in the Life Sciences: Techniques in Cardiovascular Physiology, Part I (Linden RJ, ed), Elsevier Scientific Publishers, Ireland Ltd., 1983, pp 312/1–312/24.Google Scholar
- 10.Pratt CM, Roberts R. Baylor College of Medicine Cardiology Series, 8(5):5–23, 1985.Google Scholar
- 14.Roberts R. Newsletter of the Council on Clinical Cardiology, American Heart Association, Volume 11, No. 1, SC-85-CLC, January 1985, pp. 1–17.Google Scholar